4.8 Article

Tensile properties of Arabidopsis cell walls depend on both a xyloglucan cross-linked microfibrillar network and rhamnogalacturonan II-borate complexes

Journal

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 132, Issue 2, Pages 1033-1040

Publisher

AMER SOC PLANT BIOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.1104/pp.103.021873

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The mechanical properties of plant organs depend upon anatomical structure, cell-cell adhesion, cell turgidity, and the mechanical properties of their cell walls. By testing the mechanical responses of Arabidopsis mutants, it is possible to deduce the contribution that polymers of the cell wall make to organ strength. We developed a method to measure the tensile parameters of the expanded regions of turgid or plasmolyzed dark-grown Arabidopsis hypocotyls and applied it to the fucose biosynthesis mutant mur1, the xyloglucan glycosyltransferase mutants mur2 and mur3, and the katanin mutant bot1. Hypocotyls from plants grown in the presence of increasing concentrations of dichlorobenzonitrile, an inhibitor of cellulose synthesis, were considerably weakened, indicating the validity of our approach. In order of decreasing strength, the hypocotyls of mttr2 > bot1 and mur1 > mur3 were each found to have reduced strength and a proportionate reduction in modulus compared with wild type. The tensile properties of the hypocotyls and of the inflorescence stems of mur1 were rescued by growth in the presence of high concentrations of borate, which is known to cross-link the pectic component rhamnogalacturonan II. From comparison of the mechanical responses of mur2 and mur3, we deduce that galactose-containing side chains of xyloglucan make a major contribution to overall wall strength, whereas xyloglucan fucosylation plays a comparatively minor role. We conclude that borate-complexed rhamnogalacturonan II and galactosylated xyloglucan contribute to the tensile strength of cell walls.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available